-- the 401k with, are you concerned the choices, but maybe he will not support some of them? >> cable be in asia, number one -- [laughter] that was a joke, i was joking on that one. know, we are working very closely with the white house on this. as you know, was the big six, we worked very hard on the parameters and on the decision of what goes into this. the tax writers are working on the details, on how to make the framework happen and we are working closely with the white house so that there will be no surprises from our partners in the white house or the senate when we do this. thank you very much, everybody.

an answer bank house minority leader nancy pelosi also addressed the budget resolution at the weekly press reason. -- at the weekly press briefing. >> good morning? good morning everyone. what an eventful morning it has been, really one that marks a trend -- a transformative moment for our country. this morning, when the republicans voted to advance the theyt that they put forth, drew a line in the sand between the middle class and working families, and the wealthy and corporate america in our country. it is really unfortunate, but it is at least an opportunity for

the american people to understand more clearly what the debate is here, in washington dc. on one side, of that line in the sand, we have the republicans in congress who are in their dna, committed to the mission of getting tax breaks for the wealthiest people in our country. that is a budget that they put tax cuts willthe go to the top 1%. in another way that is an insult on the middle class, it is an assault on the state and local tax deductions. i bring this up because it affects everyone. the district of columbia for example, and you own a home, you will be negatively impacted. in the district of columbia,

137,000 or more people, and i bring this up as i us human that you live here or if you live in 1,000,350 4000 people, if you live in virginia, same thing, 1.5 million people are affected. in the district of columbia, the deduction is $16,000 and you will no longer have that reduction. if you live in virginia, the average deduction is over $11,000. if you live in maryland, the average deduction is $12,000. so, you will lose that deduction under this land. not only that, under this land, it has been reported under the plan that the value of your home would lose 10%. you can thank the republicans in congress for that. as they misrepresent

what they are doing to the middle class, what they are doing is doing them, putting your homes -- they are limiting homesing.t your g yourre lootin cut togiving a biggs tax -- atgher and of society the same time committee are increasing the national debt. this element is transformative because the amount of money, that trillions of dollars in increase of that is very hard to come back from. and underident obama, president clinton, we came back from the deficit that existed when he they took office.

we were either in balance or in surplus. when president bush left office, the deficit was $1.4 trillion. about ane talking enormous amount of money. the national debt increased by an enormous amount, in terms of the deficit, as opposed to the debt which increased by trillions of dollars. then we go to president obama, who again reverses that and now we come to president trump. , the budget, as we saw the other day, 80% of the advantage goes to the top 1%. who pays? the middle class. the fact that they say that it is a middle-class tax cut is not true, it is wrong. when they come forth with their tax bill, you will see it more

clearly. what the republicans did today an open pass, to this assault. g ripoff, a shakedown, a lootin of the middle class. arnold 20 wrote about the history of civilization -- arnold tornby, and he talked about the societies and governments who were there with creative leadership, where people could thrive and succeed versus exploiters -- exploitative situations, where the governments were there for the rich and powerful. that is not a good thing for a country. and that is the path that these republicans are taking us down. so very calmly, we say to them,

we want tax reform, but we want to do it in a way that is fair, ,as simplification, has growth that reduces the deficit, creates jobs and keeps america number one. instead, we have a budget that they put forth that does not do that. misrepresent how good it is for the middle class, which it is not. hopefully when the bill comes up, the public will be aware of what to look for in it. know how they pay the price for this big transfer of wealth. the wealth is sucked up from the middle class to high income people, the 1%, as well as the wealthy corporations in our country. it is really startling and and stunning, a

massive con. this is not about politics. this is about the american people, and how policy here affects them. insteado to the table to create growth, create good paying jobs, reduce the deficit, and reduce taxes on the middle class. that is about all i have to say unless you have some questions. of thenia, i'm so proud california governor who wrote individually to each of the members to say how bad this would be. and you know what, i loved it. in the letter, he said, not only are you take away the deduction from individual filers, but you keep it for corporations in this bill. that individual filer, maybe you have a home and you take a

deduction for state and local taxes for, you lose that to the corporations. whose side are they on? again, it is a moment off definition -- a moment of definition. we will not allow them to misrepresent the facts on this tax bill to the american people. it is heartbreaking because it could have come together to do something in a bipartisan way that would be sustainable. you cannot do tax reform without bipartisanship. you cannot have sustainability if you will only give certainty to the business community, and not given to individuals so they can act on their personal and business decisions. questions? >> thank you, leader pelosi.

if the republicans stay on the current track they are on, is your primary goal to see its failure at this point? >> yes, we are here for the american people. we do not want the impact to be on the american people. the problem with the tax bill is not just the harm that it does directly in terms of state and local tax deductions, that is just one example. but also, because they take it so deeply into debt, the opportunity cost for our budget to invest in education, it will necessitate a trillion dollars being cut out of medicaid. that is part of their plan. $.5 trillion coming out of medicare. they will at a cost to education , that is about the health and well-being of our families and the future of our country in terms of education being essential. way, any moneye spent on education -- nothing

brings more money to the treasury investing in education. , secondaryhood, k-12 education, that is a fact. they undermine that opportunity for investment and they are increasing the deficit, not saving any money. so we would hope that -- i think what these numbers walk the membersr -- what these are walking the plank for, they will have to answer for. they would be great to defeat this and go to the speaker and say, we want something different. in fact, they have enhanced and given leverage to the exploiters. anybody? question on immigration and your negotiating

stance between now and december. the speaker told some of his colleagues that the spending bill will include some solutions for daca and other conversations that are continuing. what is your updated sense of where the issue stands and what your potential leverage points are going into that bill? let me just say about our dreamers, they are really a blessing to our country. i have had to them, six meetings related to dreamers and a said to them, to me a favor, thank your parents for bringing you here because you have been such an inspiration to our country. you are so great, and the american people recognize that. over 80% want them to stay.

high numbers want them to stay on a path to citizenship and i think president trump is inclined to be supportive. he said that he is and i take him at his word. because the american people support this. are soause we persuasive, but because the american people support the dreamers. i am optimistic that we will celebrate, hopefully thanksgiving but more likely christmas, with a dream act passed. >> these still see your caucus holding together on that? withholding support for the spending bill? >> i did not say that, i just said that we are going to pass the dream act. our caucus is overwhelmingly supportive of the dreamers and i believe the speaker brought a bill to the floor, it would pass overwhelmingly with republican votes and many of our republican colleagues support the dreamers.

talkeds frequently about, it is just waiting for a vote and the speaker will give us a vote. you are just waiting to get a vote and we think we have them. yes sir? >> can you comment on the decision to declare --? rep. pelosi: what i would say to the president on that is, show me the money. what is the point if we pass a -- instead the president has sent a budget here that cuts the medicaid which is the major funder of how we address opioids . as the governor of ohio has pointed out so clearly, sent. for medicaid in terms of fighting the opioid epidemic. -- thank god for medicaid as he said. androvides substance abuse

mental health agencies with funds who are there to address these needs. if declaring the emergency means he can have access to the funds, but the funds are about 57,000 or $58,000, -- show me the money. it is ok, we all agreed. we passed the act last year, we all agree that this is the place we have to go. i had the speaker write me a letter that we will continue to have the funding in the appropriations bill, but the president made a statement without the money. --ry district in the country it is not like you can say, well, people in a certain area are warmer or colder or whatever, it is all over the country. so hopefully, the concerns of our colleagues will be manifested in the allocation of the resources. that you have to have the resources.

reporter: on the kennedy documents, we are still waiting the national archives chuckle 'release of them. did you have any nagging questions and what do you think the significance of the release of these documents will be? >> it was a sad, terrible tragedy in our country. obviously, as many people at the time, we were so stricken by the president's assassination. moment iss positive no history, it may change because he was an inspiration to many but i cannot take to something that i have not seen. >> will it put it to rest, or will it generate more -- >> it depends. on the many accounts i have heard, it will only contribute to conspiracy theories -- i do not know.

until we see, -- what is it, today? >> we are not sure. rep. pelosi: i am sure many people will be interested to see. budget, what is the status of talks with republicans in the white house on a deal to raise discretionary cap and when will the defenseators have real and nondefense discretionary levels in law for fiscal year 2018? >> hopefully soon. onhad some discussions going in the house and senate, and whenthe white house as to that will happen. it has to happen soon and we are insisting on parity. if they are going to lift the tos on one side, they need lift the caps on the domestic discretionary side as well. >> what does the white house say on that?

>> i really cannot going to those conversations, but i am optimistic. it has to happen soon so that we can have it done by the end of -- the continuing resolution which is the first or second weekend of december. they changed the date, i am not sure exactly when. >> in the wake of the wildfires in california, congress has been hung up for years on permanent wildfire funding. a lot of debate about forest policy. are you seeing any outlines of an agreement providing a solution for providing funding for prevention programs? >> i hope so. i am not familiar -- one of the problems is that instead of having mitigation to begin with

on how we can prevent a lot of this, some of the money is spent on putting out fires which is what we have to do, but we would rather not have them in the first place. said to have -- i think it will be bipartisan. i didn't see it as a partisan issue at all. we have seen the tragedy in our area. my colleagues, mike thompson, his district, it was like an inferno, and he had some ideas about this. fromlleagues, jim costa the fresno area has been on this case for a long time. so i think we can come to a tim costa. i think we can come to a case of finding resources to help the american people? >> to have been some hung up. especially debate about what kind of forest policy such as

too much lobbying or environmental rules. and as i understand, the speaker has been resistant to allowing some of these large wildfire disasters to go into the fema emergency budget. >> well, they should certainly going to the budget. they are a natural disaster and there is no question that they should go into the fema budget. --did you say >> did you say the speaker was reluctant? serious, this is deadly in terms of our country. the value that we place in our natural resources for sure, but again the impact that it has on human life, first and foremost. so i think that we should be able to come to some terms on that. i see that separate the money coming out of fema. but on the management of forests , etc., hopefully can find common ground.

>> just to get back to your previous topic, in terms of the discretionary cap negotiations and so on, is your hope or expectation that by december eight, there will be an omnibus that will be voted on, or do you expect there to be some more time to work out either another resolution to allow an omnibus to be done -- >> i do not see why we need to have another continuing resolution. as soon as we get that all caps, we know how the allocation will be on the appropriations committee. hopefully that made known to us, sometimes they do not let us know, but hopefully that will be made known. you will insist upon it, and then we'll go from there. , we have to keep the country strong and part of that is our military might and

what we do on the defense side of it and out of it is the health, education and well-being of the american people, what we do on the discretionary side of it. know whether dragging it out at the end, what we are going to know that we do not already know now. is to let us get on with it and remove all doubt. if it requires -- if we reach if itent in some time, takes another week just to do the legislation, that is a different story, but not just to drag out the conversation because the debate is a clear one. everyone knows what it is right now. >> but if you're going to have an omnibus by december 8, which in not like to have the caps agreed to and locked in? rep. pelosi: free soon, hopefully we will. we will do someone else and then -- >> on opioids, you said

commissioner me the money when it came to the president's decision to declare it an national health emergence the. but the administration said this morning that they were talking to congress about how to provide more money for that by the end of the year. where with the caucus be on that? rep. pelosi: i do not know what they mean by talking to congress -- i didn't know who they are talking to. the appropriators and other authorizers, it is a bipartisan issue. still, not so much money to deal with it, i cannot speak to what that would be-- the last person to tell you what the white house conversations are, assuming it is the republicans in congress on this, but again, if we have that caps

listed, there is more opportunity for the national institute of health, for opioids, these are some of the things that could benefit from that. but i have no idea what they are talking about. coming to congress to ask more money for this? rep. pelosi: with the congress support them? for sure. they have not. i did not see that in the announcements. you have a follow-up question, but i did not see that on the announcements. but, it has to be additional. you cannot say, as they are ip, we to do on the s-ch will have that in the state children's insurance program, we will authorize it that we will pay for it by taking money out of the prevention fund which is children's health, children's and occupations, children's test for lead, things that benefit children's health, they want to

take money from that to pay for s chip. while we are giving tax breaks to the wealthiest people in our country. so tax cuts for the rich, they do not have to be offset, they can increase the deficit. children's health, which has its own benefit to our economy, has to be paid for by other children's health. and not only that, but by undermining medicare and the health of american families, so where with this money come from? that is really the point. are we talking additionality, are we talking cannibalizing other aspects of health care in our country? yes? on jfk, in all your years on the intelligence or thetee briefings that you get nowadays, have you ever had an fbi director come to you and say that they were concerned about

what may be released? rep. pelosi: no. we talked about it. in the beginning we were talking ,bout force protection addressing overarching issues such as money rep. pelosi: that have an impact groups.rting certain we are about the here and now. future.e stay tuned on this. this is a moment of truth for america. going to go the going to we are

the future in order to go deeply into debt to fund more tax breaks at the high-end. it is a tragedy. it is a differentiation. let's hope the american people can weigh in with the republicans to pull them in to a position of fairness, growth, good paying jobs and reduction of debt. thank you. announcer: the 2018 budget house,ion passed the with the speaker casting a vote.